The dangers of repressive/authoritarian government are often couched in terms of the dangers posed by malevolence & "power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely". But the dangers of repression associated with mere incompetence are of equal if not greater importance (cont).
Human beings are biased, hubristic, and highly prone to errors of judgment - even the "experts". Human beings systematically overestimate their ability to accurately diagnose problems and effectuate solutions. For this reason, "top down" governance holds many dangers.
One of the biggest dangers of repressive government is simply that it forces the incompetence and errors of judgment of those in power onto others, rendering them powerless to resist it; and thwarts the capacity for alternative distributed, bottom up solutions to emerge.
The modern world was built through bottom up forces. Evolution is a bottom up process, and it has worked wonders in the natural world. Free countries with individual rights & free market are systems that are - more than anything - defined by their bottom up characteristics.
Everyone makes errors. Everyone is biased. But in a free system different people will hold different opinions and pursue different paths, and through some combination of randomness and openness, some systems of thought, ideas, and actions will prove more effective than others.
Those superior solutions are selected by market forces and in the free market of ideas in much the same way natural selection selects for random mutations that facilitate superior adaptation and survival in one's host environment.
In short, bottom up systems allow human societies to overcome the limitations of our own inherent incompetence, by allowing for a greater diversity of ideas and experimentation. Repressive government inevitably leads to entrenched incompetence & forced conformity to bad ideas.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Lyall Taylor

Lyall Taylor Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @LT3000Lyall

15 Sep
As a general rule, you should invest & search for ideas in areas of global markets where new funds are *not* being launched & promoted, and avoid the latter. Watch what the large asset managers do and avoid investing in areas that are their *strategic focus* for growth (eg ESG).
E.g. this is a slide from Janus Henderson's recent report. You should take a broad sample of these types of slides from major asset managers and make a mental note every time of which areas are in fashion, and diligently avoid those areas.
The reason these are "growth areas" is because that's where they can *sell* investors and raise FUM from from end investors who insist on chasing themes. This always leads to too much money chasing too few ideas in the said popular areas and valuations becoming excessive.
Read 8 tweets
22 Jul
This is a huge scandal. Paul has uncovered a Wuhan institute study that listed an NIH grant number. According to Paul, in the study, two bat coronavirus spike genes were combined w a SARS backbone, which were shown to be able to replicate in humans (cont)

The Hill's reporting claims Fauci lobbied for gain of function research to be permitted again in the US after Obama banned it. If this is true, Fauci was clearly a supporter of GOF research. Wuhan may have been funded due to the inability of such studies to happen in the US.
What is Fauci's defense (having previously told Congress unequivocally the NIH had never funded GOF research in Wuhan). He simply declared that the study Paul references is "not gain of function research", because "qualified virologists" from the NIH say so.
Read 7 tweets
21 Jul
This is an interesting (short) analysis by a Canadian doctor that is worth 8min of your time. I don't know if it's right, but it is a seemingly cogent argument that can't be easily dismissed and demands a robust rebuttal (thread).

bitchute.com/video/mZHA2u71…
The said doctor was concerned after seeing a number of his community patients experience serious side effects. He decided to undertake D-Dimer tests, which is a test to detect blood clots, and found evidence of recent blood clotting in more than 60% of his vaccinated patients.
His argument is that 75% of the mRNA spike proteins are - contrary to design/claims - going intravenous, and ultimately end up attaching to the linings of tiny capillaries (small blood vessels), following which they are attacked by platelets, resulting in blood clots.
Read 21 tweets
20 Jul
From both a markets & epidemiological perspective, I think there is some legit cause for concern here - if just from tail risk perspective. The Delta variant per se is no big deal, but early evidence of rising hospitalizations amongst vaccinated could be.

reuters.com/business/healt…
A similar trend is being seen in Israel - albeit it is still early days. Some epidemiologists believe lockdowns and vaccines are creating selection pressures on virus that are driving the prevalence of new mutations in the same way antibiotics can promote antibiotic resistance.
They do not create the variants (per se). What they can do is create more space for those variance to increase in prevalence as other variants die off. Lockdowns can select for more infectious variants (Delta), and vaccines can select for vaccine-resistant mutations.
Read 11 tweets
18 Jul
This is an example of the often breathtaking ignorance of European bureaucrats. I don't think I've ever seen so many mistakes made in a single tweet. One of the reasons improved relations with Russia is so difficult is people like this have no idea what they're talking about.
Facts: Russia's economy is growing not declining. It's leaders *do* want to diversify the economy away from natural resources, and the country *has* in fact already meaningfully diversified its economy away from resources over the past decade or so, albeit share is still high.
The rule of law needs more work but it has been improving in Russia. European gas imports are at record highs and gas prices have surged. Europe faces declining domestic O&G production in coming years & reliance on imports may rise. And Russia has built a gas pipeline to China.
Read 7 tweets
17 Jul
To some ears, this sounds sensible. To others, Orwellian.

It's because there is a commonly held misperception that repressive govt historically emerge due to "bad people doing bad things". In fact, it was driven by ppl that thought they were the good guys doing necessary things.
The issue is bigger than the short term issue at hand. The fundamental problem is the human tendency to hubris & a belief that centralized authority can and should ascertain truth. This leads to a tendency towards authoritarianism, driven by expediency & amplified by emergency.
Emergencies have often been the trigger for the emergence of repressive govt, as was the case in Hitler's Germany for eg. Emergencies lead ppl to accept the suspension of typical constitutional guardrails that prevent the excess accumulation of power, as it's considered necessary
Read 11 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(